IS INTERFAITH VIABLE?

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by HITESH SHAH

EXCERPT

Religion has to provide hope , explain intrinsic reality , guide seekers , exhort seekers for good actions , increase co-operation etc .

So true of all religions.

[BigJohn]

When Ilook at the various people who belong to the various religions, in many cases, they do not know much about their own religion but all believe in fellow love, working together within their religion, etc.

I light up when I see a Wiccan interested in Auras and Chakras, a Christian playing a Singing Bowl, a Buddhist deeply involved in Animism, A Muslim woman putting together and selling Hindu pictures, etc......

We have so much in common.

[BigJohn]

Sparks of interest flare up every once in a while catching the attention of some people that interfaith is viable. I suspect the hearts of some might rekindle that thought in the very near future.

What do we have to loose?

[Gem]

It's not going to work because religion by its nature creates division. When you become a Christian or whatever it might be you have separated yourself from humanity because 'I'm a Christian' and 'you are not a Christian' creates an inevitable 'us and them'. To keep Christianity good, evil has to be externalised from it, and evil can only exist outside 'us'; in 'them'.

By siting the bad externally we can maintain our good identity in contrast against it, so we need the evil and it inevitable starts encroaching, which threats to tarnish 'our' holy space. Then it has to be warded off, so there is conflict, but as we start to diminish it and push it far, far away, we start to lose the contrast by which we define our own goodness. Hence we conjure another demon in the heathen image, point to their degenerate immorality compared to our piety, thus drawing it closer to contrast ourselves more clearly, but by virtue of its necessity, it starts encroaching and the conflict erupts, and again it's fought back until we start to lose our own definition. Thus this vicious cycle continues.

The problem is, if we did say there's peaceful interfaith, where would we situate the demons?

[BigJohn]

"It's not going to work because religion by its nature creates division" is, from my perspective, not necessarily true. A core facet of religion is faith/belief. You pointed at Christianity but some could have pointed at Buddhism. Both have their 'bad sides' but at the same time, both have their really 'good sides'. I have mingled with both groups and what I find is that both groups have a lot to offer and that holds true for the other religions.

An aspect of various religions, including Christianity, is to turn our problems over to God, etc. and to ask for help such as from the Holy Spirit.

I have seen Christians intermingle with Muslims, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists. And I have seen the other groups intermingle with each other. It can be done because some have already done it.

SpiritualForums is a prime example of people getting along with each other.

As I said, what do we have to loose?

[Gem]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

As I said, what do we have to loose?

You lose the religion so there's nothing to attack or fight for and the reason we've been getting along better lately is less people are religious these days.

[Altair]

Yes, the nature of (some) religion(s) creates an 'us versus them' mentality. But I don't think it always applies. If there is room for relativism and polytheism than people are more likely to accept variety and accommodate for different paths.

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

"
SpiritualForums is a prime example of people getting along with each other.

As I said, what do we have to loose?

Well said . In psychology there is no negation because human mind has no capacity to negate for feelings. So in aircraft when there is turbulence , well studied message from the cockpit is to 'Stay calm' . It does not say 'Dont panic' for absolutely valid reason .

While I respect and appreciate the experiences of naysayers like Gem very much and consider those as safeguards/ cautions for anyone working on interfaith (because many of it are historical facts ) , the onus of making interfaith successful lies on the people who initiate by focusing , practicing ,preaching and promoting only the positive & common underlying spirit of all religions (like it has to provide hope , explain intrinsic reality , guide seekers , exhort seekers for good actions , increase co-operation , promote scientific belief etc) .

Also good deal of research into one's own scripture reveals that their own deity do not want friction / conflict with/among good people and they do not discard any possibility of existence of good people outside their influence.
e.g. In Bhagavad Geeta , Krishna says wherever you see light /aura / power , know that it is me(ie God itself) . With that progressive religious leaders in Hinduism do recognise the Jesus and Muhammad Paygamber also as re-incarnation of God just that way Buddha was added as 10th incarnation of God by brilliant Shakaracharya. With this I have come to read , understand and appreciate exponents of other traditions also with quite ease without disrespecting any in Hindu traditions also.

So I am sure in other traditions too there is great deal of respect for others . Just that 'some' religious leaders manipulate it either ignorantly or fraudulently. So its for seekers to keep their focus on right matters .

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Altair

Yes, the nature of (some) religion(s) creates an 'us versus them' mentality. But I don't think it always applies. If there is room for relativism and polytheism than people are more likely to accept variety and accommodate for different paths.

I think that won't work. To have a religion we have to fabricate abstract super-ego for people to identify with. Once identified people will give it a lot of importance because it's part of themselves. The nature of identity is to separate from and self-define by contrasting against that which it is not, so it's impossible for a religion to encompass and include 'the not' without annihilating itself. IOW, religion is exclusive by necessity and needs to maintain the 'other' in order to know itself.

The irony is, the 'other' is the site of evil, the heathen, the hell-bound, and on the surface appears as if the religion is trying to save the heathens, but that act is fabricating the 'other' as degenerate in order to contrast and define the piety of the Church, and thereby, that of the individuals that identify with it. Thus, the act of saving is equally the act of the religion trying to save itself.

Without the 'other', that which we are not, there can't be a religion. 'Us vs. them' is endemic to the very nature of the thing. A necessary feature without which a religion cannot survive.

[BigJohn]

I use to go to one religious site and look at the murals drawn on the edifice. I was amazing at the detail of the Heavens and of the Hells. I had never seen so much detail especially the gruesome parts detecting the Hells.

As you might suspect, it was a well known Buddhist Temple. As for religions, I for one, look at Buddhism as a religion via one of its simplest definitions.

Some people, today, learn from Buddhism just as they do from Christianity and from the other religions. From my perspective, the more we study/learn from other religions, the more I see we have much in common and the differences disappear.

Maybe....... we are all one, who knows?